Education

Bar Admissions

Aarti focuses her practice on patent litigation and has extensive experience as trial counsel, having served in the US International Trade Commission (ITC) as a senior investigative attorney prior to joining Mintz Levin. During her tenure at the ITC’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations, she served as lead counsel for the federal government in seven trials and in over 25 ITC investigations, covering trade secrets, trademarks, and electrical, computer, mechanical, and chemical patents. She particularly enjoys simplifying technology for judges and juries, devising creative and pragmatic strategies, and working closely with in-house counsel.

Prior to her work with the ITC, Aarti practiced as a patent litigator with an international law firm, where she handled district court litigations relating to computer, electrical, mechanical, and pharmaceutical technologies. She also handled appellate litigation before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and provided counsel on patent portfolios and infringement opinions.

Representative Matters

Certain Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Consumer Products Containing the Same (337-TA-1044) Filed an ITC complaint on behalf of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). The patented technology covers graphics processing technology employed by smart devices such as televisions and handsets. Respondents include LG, VIZIO, MediaTek, and Sigma Designs. The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for early December 2017.

Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-1023) Represent Complainant Netlist, Inc., a California memory module company, in the ITC asserting six patents against the Korean-based memory giant SK hynix. The technology claimed by the asserted patents is essential to the JEDEC DDR4 RDIMM and LRDIMM standards, which are implemented by the accused imported products. The respondents are asserting novel RAND defenses in the ITC, and in a co-pending case involving the same patents in the District Court for the Central District of California. The ITC evidentiary hearing is scheduled for early May 2017, while the trial in the CDCA is scheduled for July of 2018.

Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-984) Represented owner of portfolio of graphics processing and microprocessor patents as Complainant in an ITC investigation adverse to a number of automotive manufacturers, and infotainment system and chip suppliers. Respondents include Honda, Toyota, BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, NVIDIA, Texas Instruments, Renesas, Harman International, and Fujitsu-Ten. The investigation instituted in January of 2016 and resolved favorably prior to the conclusion of expert discovery in August of 2016.

Certain Communications or Computing Devices and Components Thereof (337-TA-925) Represented owner of portfolio of communications and computing patents from former enterprise communications business unit of large multinational innovation company. An ITC investigation was instituted in August 2014 as to respondent entities Apple, Samsung Electronics, LG Electronics and HTC Corporation. Google participated as an intervenor. The investigation resolved prior to evidentiary hearing in June of 2015.

Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing Capabilities (337-TA-884) Represented owners of the patent portfolio of the original Silicon Graphics, now known as Graphics Properties Holdings, as complainant in the ITC. Investigation was instituted in June 2013 and among the respondent entities were Panasonic, Toshiba, Vizio, and ZTE. Most respondents settled. After an evidentiary hearing held over several days in May 2014, on August 29, 2014 Mintz Levin successfully obtained a recommendation for a Limited Exclusion Order against the remaining respondent, which chose to settle while Commission review of the Administrative Law Judge’s Initial Determination was pending.

Certain Hair Irons (337-TA-637) Lead government counsel in investigation involving the trademark and trade dress of the CHI™ hair iron which was resolved by summary determination motion, and the issuance of a General Exclusion Order.

Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (337-TA-692) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing involving Murata Manufacturing Corporation and Samsung regarding the structure of capacitors.

Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (337-TA-739) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing and enforcement proceeding between Leviton Inc. and various foreign manufacturers of ground fault circuit interrupters, where a General Exclusion Order was issued.

Certain Coenzyme Q10 Products and Methods of Making Same (337-TA-790) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing involving Kaneka Corporation and multiple Chinese and Japanese manufacturers regarding a method for the production of coenzyme Q10.

Aarti focuses her practice on patent litigation and has extensive experience as trial counsel, having served in the US International Trade Commission (ITC) as a senior investigative attorney prior to joining Mintz Levin. During her tenure at the ITC’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations, she served as lead counsel for the federal government in seven trials and in over 25 ITC investigations, covering trade secrets, trademarks, and electrical, computer, mechanical, and chemical patents. She particularly enjoys simplifying technology for judges and juries, devising creative and pragmatic strategies, and working closely with in-house counsel.

Prior to her work with the ITC, Aarti practiced as a patent litigator with an international law firm, where she handled district court litigations relating to computer, electrical, mechanical, and pharmaceutical technologies. She also handled appellate litigation before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and provided counsel on patent portfolios and infringement opinions.

Representative Matters

Certain Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Consumer Products Containing the Same (337-TA-1044) Filed an ITC complaint on behalf of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). The patented technology covers graphics processing technology employed by smart devices such as televisions and handsets. Respondents include LG, VIZIO, MediaTek, and Sigma Designs. The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for early December 2017.

Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-1023) Represent Complainant Netlist, Inc., a California memory module company, in the ITC asserting six patents against the Korean-based memory giant SK hynix. The technology claimed by the asserted patents is essential to the JEDEC DDR4 RDIMM and LRDIMM standards, which are implemented by the accused imported products. The respondents are asserting novel RAND defenses in the ITC, and in a co-pending case involving the same patents in the District Court for the Central District of California. The ITC evidentiary hearing is scheduled for early May 2017, while the trial in the CDCA is scheduled for July of 2018.

Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same (337-TA-984) Represented owner of portfolio of graphics processing and microprocessor patents as Complainant in an ITC investigation adverse to a number of automotive manufacturers, and infotainment system and chip suppliers. Respondents include Honda, Toyota, BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, NVIDIA, Texas Instruments, Renesas, Harman International, and Fujitsu-Ten. The investigation instituted in January of 2016 and resolved favorably prior to the conclusion of expert discovery in August of 2016.

Certain Communications or Computing Devices and Components Thereof (337-TA-925) Represented owner of portfolio of communications and computing patents from former enterprise communications business unit of large multinational innovation company. An ITC investigation was instituted in August 2014 as to respondent entities Apple, Samsung Electronics, LG Electronics and HTC Corporation. Google participated as an intervenor. The investigation resolved prior to evidentiary hearing in June of 2015.

Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing Capabilities (337-TA-884) Represented owners of the patent portfolio of the original Silicon Graphics, now known as Graphics Properties Holdings, as complainant in the ITC. Investigation was instituted in June 2013 and among the respondent entities were Panasonic, Toshiba, Vizio, and ZTE. Most respondents settled. After an evidentiary hearing held over several days in May 2014, on August 29, 2014 Mintz Levin successfully obtained a recommendation for a Limited Exclusion Order against the remaining respondent, which chose to settle while Commission review of the Administrative Law Judge’s Initial Determination was pending.

Certain Hair Irons (337-TA-637) Lead government counsel in investigation involving the trademark and trade dress of the CHI™ hair iron which was resolved by summary determination motion, and the issuance of a General Exclusion Order.

Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (337-TA-692) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing involving Murata Manufacturing Corporation and Samsung regarding the structure of capacitors.

Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (337-TA-739) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing and enforcement proceeding between Leviton Inc. and various foreign manufacturers of ground fault circuit interrupters, where a General Exclusion Order was issued.

Certain Coenzyme Q10 Products and Methods of Making Same (337-TA-790) Lead government counsel in patent infringement hearing involving Kaneka Corporation and multiple Chinese and Japanese manufacturers regarding a method for the production of coenzyme Q10.

Industries

Create PDF

Include:

Publications

Alerts & Advisories

Industry Reports & Newsletters

Published Articles

Speaking Engagements

Newsroom

Press Releases

In The News

NOTICE:
Please note that contacting Mintz Levin by email, telephone or facsimile will not establish
an attorney-client relationship, obligate us to act as your attorney or respond to you regardless
of the content of your communication. Completion of Mintz Levin's new client and new matter intake
protocol, including without limitation the firm’s conflicts checking process and an engagement letter,
is necessary to establish an attorney-client relationship. Absent a current attorney-client relationship
with Mintz Levin, any information or documents communicated or transmitted by you to Mintz Levin will not
be treated as confidential, secret or protected in any way. If you are not a current client of Mintz Levin,
please do not send any confidential information to us through this web site or otherwise concerning any
potential or actual legal matter you have. Before providing any confidential information to us, you must
obtain permission to do so from one of the firm’s lawyers.

Email This Page

Your privacy is important to us. Mintz Levin uses the names,
e-mail addresses, and notes you provide only to transmit the information you would like to send to us through this page.
We do not sell the information collected through this website to anyone. If you are not a current Mintz Levin client,
please do not include any information that you or another party considers confidential on this form.
Please also see our Disclaimer & Privacy Statement.